skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Justin Kan (Twitch founder) is calling for Ken Griffin and Robinhood's co-founders to jailed.
> Just got a tip that Citadel reloaded their shorts before they told Robinhood to stop trading $GME.

> If this is true, Ken Griffin and the Robinhood founders should be in jail.

> This is class warfare.

See https://twitter.com/justinkan/status/1354856228661334017.
You're missing that they lent the money specifically so they were no longer exposed to the short position.
Where this might get tricky is if you seriously want to support non-destructive editing as well, because in that case any filter that can be applied in non-destructive mode effectively needs to become part of the file format specification, too.
If you count also performance reproducibility, then the answers can hardly go in many different directions.
Halting buy orders on stocks that the Wall Street powerhouses are betting will go down seems like enough for me... Refueling your shorts is the icing on the cake.
> I think the cat is out of the bag on this one

You mean that stock market manipulation is now in the hands of normies who don't wear a suit-and-tie and are not your typical business mogul who has regular insight into stocks and likes to play the stock market casually and for fun?
All the pretty UX in the world doesn't mean a thing if there's a pretty message in the app saying that you are not allowed to do the thing you want to do.
I've read that there are books composed in the form of text messages. People like the short style. The impact of this is that people who read that way end up with lower literacy. Full length books are hard for them to read.

The shift in screen size is an interesting one. The technology influences the content and even the way we think. It's not a passive element.
Because uh, CCP is, CCP is life.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pyUxsKTi2ZI
Class Action Lawsuit Filed Against Robinhood
Halting buying and selling is even worst - it means that people are locked into owning GME even if it tanks to 0.

(someone please correct if wrong)

Edit: I know they haven't halted selling, this is directly in response to a part of the parent's comment
I don't think you understand what closing a position means.
Don't worry, google knows how to obscure these things. Just look at the voting on Biden's inaugural youtube videos. One day tens of thousands of down votes. Next day just a few thousand.

source: https://reclaimthenet.org/youtube-scrubs-thousands-of-dislik...
Why would they? They just need spam protection. If legitimate, independent users vote them down in thousands then why would an app need a protection?
The Most Significant AI Achievements of 2020
They aren't random. He's a gigantic patent troll and has a strong vested interest in maintaining the appearance of being a quirky inventor.

I suppose he genuinely is one, to a degree, but the fact that he made a killing by squeezing actual innovators en masse robs the situation of most of its charm.
Shift-JIS? GB18030? KOI8-R?

"Plain text" does not really exist.
The person at the door was very diligently checking. This was the SF Costco, in the early days of the pandemic lockdowns, so perhaps it's unique to that specific location or those specific circumstances. Indeed, just a few weeks ago I went to another Bay Area Costco intending to inquire about membership, and the person at the door was just handing out promotional flyers, so I helped myself to a quick self-guided tour of the store to see if I thought membership made sense for my household (I did decide to buy a membership, for what it's worth).
I think a lot of the volatility could be attributed to moving money around. When you want to move money out of a country you need to find someone willing to sell bitcoin in the currency you have. Then you need to find someone willing to buy the bitcoin in the new currency you want. Since it’s difficult already to move money between said currencies, the friction is likely to be seen as volatility in the price. You’ll also see big swings just from moving a lot of money.

I’d be more skeptical of the moving money around hypothesis but I know people who looked into it when thinking about leaving the US. So at least people are honestly looking at bitcoin for that purpose, even if it may be impractical.
There should be zero stars available for scamsters. Seriously this should be an option. Why should anyone give one star to a scamming firm Robbing Hood which has colluded with their backer Citadel. They have derogatory term for Retail Investors - Dumb Money. Now the 'Dumb Money' has figured out the the hedge funds'rigged game.
When retail in traders en masse decide that a trading platform is impinging upon their rights, the SEC should be obligated to open an investigation. Isn't this pretty much a major component of their intended purpose?
when such unjust is done to the mass, this may just spill over to violence.
If I were RH/Melvin/Citadel, I'd watch over my shoulders.

SEC needs to intervene quick
>>The rest of the institutional guys are fine and don't care about this except

I have been in frequent touch with my wall street friends. Many are "fine" and the general feeling is that long term this will get sorted out, but many of them took some hits and are watching this very carefully. Many firms had to move out of long positions to get capital, so this had trickle down effects elsewhere in the market.

Things that undermine the credibility of the market and bring congressional oversight hearings into the conversation aren't just being ignored.

Even they agree, it feels like "something is off" but who might be doing bad things is still unclear to everyone, even guys I know with 15+ years in the industry.
Not exactly a day later but the ratings tend to come with 6 to 12 hours delay. Sometimes more.

Also, there's this strange thing that some of the ratings disappear and come back later or not.
According to Motherboard it's more than half.

https://twitter.com/motherboard/status/1354798244455395328

EDIT: This is untrue, please refer to jaywalk's reply.
Tim Cook warns of adtech fuelling a “social catastrophe”
Another part of this is that I think the intel line will probably be on "maintenance mode" at Apple for now; the best and brightest engineers are probably all working on Apple Silicon products...
Citadel is a hedge fund that owns Melvin Capital Management.

Melvin is a $GME short seller predicted to lose BILLIONS due to the people taking the free market back.

Citadel owns the app Robinhood.

Citadel banned purchases of new $GME shares on RH.

Market manipulation.

https://twitter.com/shane_riordan/status/1354786445668610049

^ quoted from here

Ooops their correction here:

https://twitter.com/shane_riordan/status/1354787975058616320
> Why put yourself on the hook for something during a black swan event?

Because that is also often when it is a good time to make money.

It's entirely unsurprising to me that short pressure on the stock would increase after this.
> With that comes some unique space challenges, including but not limited to how does having a desk work if only 50% of people are in the office on a given day.

I've heard of companies hot-desking like this so they can have fewer desks than total employees, splitting each desk between people whose schedules are "out of phase" with each other. It sounds basically intolerable.

I'm somewhat less sensitive to many common office complaints than a lot of sw engineers I've worked with, but if this were something my employer announced I'd be on my way out immediately.
Then why not communicate that in a diplomatic way. Their business and user base is at stake
Here's the source --

Citadel, Point72 to Invest $2.75 Billion Into Melvin Capital Management - WSJ [0]

Read As: Melvin no longer has a short position. Citadel (edit: or like someone else said, a 3rd party) does. Citadel will handle this. Melvin is in time out.

We'll figure out who holds the chips in a few weeks time when filing deadlines are due. Thus it's dark.

Thus explains the perfectly executed short ladder today - could only be pulled off by someone with more dry powder than Melvin - but if you look at the Level II data, this is going to take a long, long time.

[0]https://www.wsj.com/articles/citadel-point72-to-invest-2-75-...
Health Workers, Stuck in the Snow, Administer Vaccines to Stranded Drivers
That assumes people will buy said shares. That's contentious at best.
Thank you. This was great.
But the app is broken. They are not allowing you to buy shares. Why should an app that decides you can't buy certain shares, and they auto-sells some shares you own, be rated highly?
Could we see a class action? Is there a case?
I really don't think you'll get a good answer from anyone for a couple of days at least. This is quite unprecedented (not them halting buying of a certain stock, but the whole situation with its underlying context).
Killer robot wars paper meets “War Games” movie conclusion
This article https://www.theregister.com/2019/05/15/lethal_ai_weapons/ tells of the coming killer robot wars, and ironically meets some of the same conclusions as the 1983 movie War Games: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086567.
Can Laws (i.e. international treaties, etc.) prevent LAWS (Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems)?
What would be something positive about allowing mobbing?
The post was locked because it had received hundreds of flags and comments complaining that the post was broken -- even with the moderator note at the bottom -- and several edits trying to "fix" the post. See https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/250099#comment637_2...
Yeah I don't believe it. Or they transferred it to a complicit 3rd party who will eventually benefit.
App Store also allows you to reset the ratings when you launch an update
ISTM you might be revealing more than you intend about the diversity of your social media contacts?
I just chose a random big user facing site and it has similar anti class action terms

https://www.uber.com/legal/en/document/?name=general-terms-o...
When your marketing model is built entirely on sticking it to the man, how do you communicate that the man has you by the balls and you have no recourse because your business model is built on the man paying you off.
It seems obvious that the claimed damages for the class action lawsuit would be much larger if sell orders were blocked. Since we know with certainty price will crash, claimed damages would increase by the share value of shareholders at time of restriction.
Robinhood owners are the ones bleeding money from GME.
This is one reason to drive everyone's retirement into 401ks.

The more stock that is held in 401ks, the easier it is for the hedge funds to manipulate stock prices with very few movements, because the majority of the stock is held long term without the holders knowing or being interested in the particular stock.
Cool idea, thanks for the tip.
The full title is:

> Apple’s Tim Cook warns of adtech fuelling a “social catastrophe” as he defends app tracker opt-in.

But it was too long for the form on HN. If someone could suggest a better alternative please let me know.
You are completely right. But the answer to this is always the same: off-topic Stallman ad hominem

> Linux is a peculiar beast here. The kernel is largely developed by big corps, but playing by the copyleft rules, because it's such a fundamental infrastructure.

Not quite. linux is the success of the past! but already corrupted by "tainted" kernel...

linux adopted GPL, which was *unthinkable* by corporate back then. But because devs didn't cave in to "permissive license fallacy", they had to eat it up.

The thing is, GPL is severely outdated. It does nothing to force Google, Amazon to open source their code that they profit from because of an OSS base work. GPL, with tainted kernel, merely force them to open source irrelevant parts of Android. The drivers and spyware-DRM can all remain proprietary. And does *absolutely nothing* to their bread and butter, which is hosted services on top of OSS software.

until we stick to GPLv3 like linux stuck with GPL, opensource is point less.
Automatic Flamegraphs for Benchmarks in Rust
UTF-640K?
I'm not denying it helps and isn't significant. But why do you need to inherit a few million just to feel secure enough to pursue entrepreneurship? Being an entrepreneur doesn't mean you have to go big or go home. There is just as much entrepreneurship with immigrants as there is with the US-born, with the former less likely to have a comfortable safety net.
> Reviewing, testing and maintaining code takes up development time that could be used more productively. If there's something wrong with the PR (say, code style issues or mistakes) then you need to run through the cycle all over again.

OK, so your argument here is that maintainer doesn't want to create CI checks because it takes time and he knows the code style and doesn't need those.

> The project is open source in that you're free to use it, sell it and go through its code. Open source does not, however, imply that someone must put in the work for you if you want to apply changes to the code yourself.

But why close yourself to others? It is like throwing mic, or as if you would mark this thread as closed and no one would be allowed to comment - antisocial behavior.

You don't need to merge PRs, but come one, if you are a sole maintainer of a project, this project is not that big, and you for sure aren't getting that many PRs.

And also, one could consider PRs because you could find another person that understands your project goals and would be your co-maintainer.

Why such strange attitude here on HN? I found this place as very open and what I see in this thread praising of close-minded people.

Most projects seek contributors not alienate them.
The internet told me that, too. It's a little early to know if it's a good one. If it's a bunch of crooked whales putting a different bunch of crooked whales out of business, I'm not enthusiastic. Especially if the revolution also screws over a bunch of hapless commoners.
It is very likely that their "upstream" partners asserted this, and Robinhood didn't have much of a choice. Their biggest mistake is probably the god-awful communication with customers about this decision.
In my province, the rent office arranges for two measures to counterbalance and increase mobility. Firstly, most rental agreements are made to end on July 1st - legally up to 1974 but now mostly out of tradition. This allows for much less friction, as everyone can change housing without any downtime with access to the full market.

Secondly, landlords are allowed to evict if they do sufficient improvements to the property, which allows a safety valve.

There are so many people that move in the month of July, that over 7% of the entire population - including people who don't rent - moves out on that day. It's pretty much impossible to get a rental truck to move for the entire month of July.

The statistics are that, around July 1st alone, 250 000 out of 900 000 people move. Add in people that don't move in this period, and you get almost half of renters in the entire city moving, despite strict rent control.

You just need to do your rent control carefully. There will be some reduction in mobility, but if you counterbalance them, you can have minimal impacts in mobility and large impact in affordability.
My understanding is that Robinhood didn't actually block these purchases but rather the service they use to buy/sell stocks blocked it called Citadel

So it's not Robinhood, persay, but rather Citadel.

Why did Citadel block purchasing of GME stock? Because Citadel just invested 2 billion dollars in Melvin Capital Management; one of the hedge funds that has a lot to lose as long as the GME stocks keep going up.
It seems to me it's because "market makers" are a thing. Market making activities create billions in profits. But we are seeing the flaw in the market making algorithms.

Do we need market makers to let us always take a position in every single option when no real market for that option exists? I would argue no. It's completely artificial and they profit from it. If companies want to be market makers and profit from every single transaction, they need to be prepared to take a loss when the math doesn't swing their way.
will do cheers
The SEC has led the charge of government agencies away from anything that could reasonably be called regulation. Take note of how often the term 'oversight' is used vs 'regulation' when these guys are talking.
Recruiting Process Can Help You Better Assess Candidates
Commoditizing software was never a strategy, at least until a very recent stage. Open source software projects commoditized software either by being vastly more successful and out-competing their alternatives (gcc[1]), or by being a singularly better value proposition than their alternatives (linux[2]). The companies which have "commoditized their complements", used "open source as a growth strategy", or "become entrenched monopolies" have always had a rather sketchy relationship with open source software, which is why they have preferred to avoid an actual free software license.[3]

[1] Back in the good ol' days, everybody made C/C++ compilers. OS vendors made compilers highly tuned for their hardware and software; others, like embedded vendors, made compilers tightly integrated with their tooling. Then gcc showed up everywhere, and started producing optimized code better than the tuned products. By the time LLVM appeared (2003?), its only real competition was gcc and a fork of gcc.

[2] Originally, Unix vendors had incremental improvements over their competitors in specific areas (IBM: SMIT/JFS, SiliG: graphics, etc.). Initially, Linux was a joke. Then it became as stable as the vendor OSs and the hardware it ran on was cheaper. Then it ran on any hardware. It may never have achieved feature-advantages over the competition, but taken as an entire package, the competition couldn't provide anywhere near enough value.

[3] IBM's a funny case, especially with Red Hat. IBM hasn't had a functioning software (or hardware?) product for at least 30 years.
can you send more details? not familiar with the Calvax process
A path to empowering user choice and boosting user trust in advertising
Can this really be true? It sounds so implausible that I'm not sure if I can take their tweeted word for it.
Trading algos have been fine tuned a certain way. Now suddenly some group changes the conventions and rules of investing, is confusing the system. This is not going well with many investors and funds.
Steam (video game store) has separate "reviews" and "recent reviews" summaries, so you will see something like "reviews: mostly positive, recent reviews: overwhelmingly negative". It is often informative, as updates can make a good game unplayable, riddle it with microtransaction, or servers can go offline.
How could they be liable though? This is a black swan, there were no risk models predicting this, Robinhood probably didn't have a policy for market manipulation done in a decentralised and diffuse way, probably because it was never done.

It's really hard to objectively defend Robinhood, it's not their job to be the gatekeeper for millions of small fish trading some peanuts. It's quite patronising.
Maybe an app committed a sudden, devastating action against all of its users. That would be worth warning potential downloaders about, no?
Agree. In the end commercial and open source software aren't that different: the more dollars you put into it, the more say you have on the roadmap.
They're not letting you open new positions in the stock or options on the stock. You can only close your existing position. Guaranteed way to make the price go down.
In certain cases, it's deserved and appropriate. If an app is scammy and the majority of its users believes it's a bad app, it should have its rating dropped.
It provides a more timely signal about an app's rating.

In its absence, you'd have the Amazon effect -- accumulate five star volume, tank / exploit the product, coast as your average is very slowly dragged down.
Because many people on social media encourage other people to give the app 1-point rating. That's something Google need to protect against. The poor rating should happen organically. But regardless, they are fucked.
Why isn't Coinbase doing a security token offering?
Literally this case
There is https://sr.ht/
Mobbing companies is completely fine and called boycotting. RH fucked up, now they must pay the price.
No, or rather, only if MM's like Citadel over-short like they did here. It's a rare catch by retail that they were overextended, and retail pounced on the opportunity, just like the MM's do against retail all the fucking time, but now that the little guys are doing the fucking, it's all fetch me my smelling salts and call the sheriff!
Is a State the Logical End Point of a Corporation? (2018)
This would seem to be a lagging indicator, not a predictor.
Execution risk that they can’t handle. When you buy/sell stock on Robinhood, they hold execution risk until they net out your position by transacting a large enough order on the market. In this situation they don’t know how to manage the execution risk on these trades, so they are losing money, so they don’t want to do them.
Serious question: Since RobinHood is a private company, does the "if you don't like it, you can build your own platform" argument apply here? Or does that only apply selectively when it benefits partisan politics?

This is the natural evolution when censorship as we've recently seen is given a pass.
Interview with Shuah Khan, Kernel Maintainer and Linux Fellow
Jason Perlow, Director of Project Insights and Editorial Content at the Linux Foundation, had an opportunity to speak with Shuah Khan about her experiences as a woman in the technology industry. She discusses how mentorship can improve the overall diversity and makeup of open source projects, why software maintainers are important for the health of open source projects such as the Linux kernel, and how language inclusivity and codes of conduct can improve relationships and communication between software maintainers and individual contributors.
I think we can be certain the SEC will open an investigation. They don't generally work in real time though.
It's not only about options. You can't buy even 1 stock of GME on non margin account. I don't understand how it has anything to do with IB risk management.